NARAIN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above five criminal miscellaneous petitions under section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, have been filed against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pokaran passed in C. R. Nos. 13/75, 55/75, 53/78, 13/79 and 11/80. As common questions are involved they are being disposed of by common order.

(2.) The four accused petitioners, Narain son of Bholu Meena, Sunda alias Jagdish son of Surja, Ramsingh alias Birbal son of Banu, and Bannaram alias Baneysingh son of Gula were wanted in many cases of Police Station, Pokaran and other police stations and almost all the cases were under sections 380 and 457, Indian Penal Code. In the three F. I. R. C. R. Nos. 13/75, 53/78 and 13/79 of Police Station Pokaran the four above named accused persons were in judicial custody for more than three months, and, therefore, on application by the accused persons the learned Magistrate vide his order dated 9-9-1980 ordered that the accused persons be discharged provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs 2,000.00 each and a surety in the like amount. Similarly in C. R. No. 55/75, Police Station, Pokaran it was expressed on behalf of the accused-petitioners that they were in judicial custody for more than four months and a report under section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure has not yet been filed. The learned Magistrate ordered that the accused persons shall be set at liberty provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,000.00 In C. R. No. 11/80 also inspite of the fact that more than three months had elapsed no charge sheet has been filed, and, therefore, it was ordered by the learned Magistrate on Sept. 9, 1980 that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,000.00 each and a surety in the like amount the accused petitioners shall be discharged. A similar order was passed in connection with C. R. No. 9/80, but no petition under section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed against that order.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioners in all the petitions is that the accused persons could not arrange for sureties being the persons of no means, and, therefore, inspite of the fact that they were ordered to be released on their furnishing sureties, they have not been able to furnish the same. It is a fit case in which the learned Magistrate should have ordered the release of the accused persons only on their personal bonds and should not have called upon them also to furnish sureties.